This is a stupid story and it makes everyone who plays into look just and un-informed.

Anyone who knows anything about anything knows that large corporations including Apple have their advertising done outside at an advertising agency and these materials are created and conceived at the agency and pitched to company representatives. The company itself has no say over what tools the agency uses in-house. I't be like tell your plumber what brand of wrenches he would use.

No, it would be like telling the plumber 'I know you normally usually use A1 brand wrenches, but we manufacture XYZ brand wrenches, and it's important to us that you use our wrenches for this job.'

It's kind of like Alpha bricks building their new brick showroom using their competitors bricks. Or Canon photographing their products using Nikon cameras.

If you're going to try and showcase what can be achieved with a particular product, you have to avoid using competing products. DUH!

Anybody who has any advertising agency experience will tell you that the agency will agree to anything in order to secure a big money client like Microsoft. If Microsoft stipulated that the creatives working on their account come to work everyday dressed in frogmen suits, the agency would agree to it unconditionally. Retraining the creatives to work on PCs is small fry compared to some of the hoops they have to jump through in order to secure business.

No, it doesn't matter how you spin this, this is a colossal cock-up for both Microsoft and the advertising agency involved. I wouldn't be surprised if this very example is used in years to come to disprove that 'there's no such thing as bad publicity'.

Meanwhile, Apple used to release iMacs in MATTE, now all GLOSSY which means NO GRAPHICS work,

iMac is marketed as a consumer machine first and foremost. If you want to do pro work, use a pro machine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messiah

It's kind of like Alpha bricks building their new brick showroom using their competitors bricks. Or Canon photographing their products using Nikon cameras.

Funny you should mention that. I forget which brand, but supposedly at least one of those two used Hasselblad cameras to make their product shots of their cameras. Yeah, it's a different kind of camera, but still a camera they don't make in house.

Quote:

Anybody who has any advertising agency experience will tell you that the agency will agree to anything in order to secure a big money client like Microsoft. If Microsoft stipulated that the creatives working on their account come to work everyday dressed in frogmen suits, the agency would agree to it unconditionally. Retraining the creatives to work on PCs is small fry compared to some of the hoops they have to jump through in order to secure business.

If that's what MS wants to do, they would better served by going to an agency that uses the tools they want used. It's better to pick people with experience in the software in question rather than take then and thrust them into a different environment. It's more than just retraining, it takes experience to get proficient, years can be spent learning all the ins and outs of a program. Creative software is a lot more complicated than wrenches or bricks. Wrenches and bricks are almost always brand-interchangeable, not so with software. Each program has a great many subtle differences in the way that they work, and a person has to relearn quite a bit to switch programs. It's unreasonable to expect, for example, a Freehand user to jump into Illustrator on a major product, or a Quark user to jump to Indesign or back, without a period of acclimation.

No, it would be like telling the plumber 'I know you normally usually use A1 brand wrenches, but we manufacture XYZ brand wrenches, and it's important to us that you use our wrenches for this job.'

It's kind of like Alpha bricks building their new brick showroom using their competitors bricks. Or Canon photographing their products using Nikon cameras.

If you're going to try and showcase what can be achieved with a particular product, you have to avoid using competing products. DUH!

Anybody who has any advertising agency experience will tell you that the agency will agree to anything in order to secure a big money client like Microsoft. If Microsoft stipulated that the creatives working on their account come to work everyday dressed in frogmen suits, the agency would agree to it unconditionally. Retraining the creatives to work on PCs is small fry compared to some of the hoops they have to jump through in order to secure business.

No, it doesn't matter how you spin this, this is a colossal cock-up for both Microsoft and the advertising agency involved. I wouldn't be surprised if this very example is used in years to come to disprove that 'there's no such thing as bad publicity'.

Your main point is spot on, so I hope you'll forgive me for picking one nit. The difficulty of doing creative work with Microsoft products doesn't really compare with the difficulty of working in a frogman suit. Perhaps a better analogy would be a client demanding that only frogs, rather than humans, do all the creative work.

While yes.. this is funny... as many have already stated, it is certainly not surprising. Pick the best tools for the job, and in ads, film and print, it's a Mac.

And likewise, I expect Apple ads using 3D animation to be made on Windows.

Quote:

And let's not forget the gamers... PC all the way.

Well, you *could* play games on a Mac using BootCamp. But you would have to buy a Mac Pro, kind of expensive...

Quote:

On the consumer side... unless the individual is seriously into gaming, and doesn't need connectivity to inhouse, work-related aps... they are considering... or have bought a Mac or Apple product. Just that simple.

And that explains why Apple has so little market share on the consummer side.
Many consummers play games.
Many consummers are on a budget. You can buy a $300 PC. It will be crap, but it will be good enough to surf and send emails. You can't buy a $300 Mac. The consummers who can afford a $1000+ iMac are also the ones with jobs that require them to work at home.

Quote:

Let it go FanBoyz from both sides, because I don't think we ever want to see ONE company truly control everything.

I certainly wouldn't want to see Steve Jobs with the market shares of Microsoft, that would be trully scary...

Quote:

MS would be better off just making a better thin-client... because Google, Unix, Linux and OpenSource is their biggest threat... not Macs.

Yes and no. Apple is not such a big threat, because it's really the same kind of company as Microsoft: control freaks, closed source, DRM everywhere. Linux is a more serious threat, because it negates the business model of both Apple and Microsoft.
But Linux is not such a real threat, because it's not meant for the desktop. I work with both Windows and Linux - and I will soon add Mac to the mix. The three platforms do not really compete.
I would not dreams of running my servers on anything but Apache, Oracle and Websphere on Linux (or BSD). I mean, I also have IIS + MS SQL Server + Tomcat servers, and it works, but just not as well. Apple is out of the picture there.
Likewise, I would not play games on anything but a Windows PC. Same with photography as a hobby - Photoshop is Photoshop, don't care if it's on Windows or Mac. Except that to get the equivalent of my custom built PC, I would have to fork the fortune for a Mac Pro.
But I'm considering a MacBookPro for my notebook - the quality is just there. Unless Apple decides to go for the full glossy screen line in the next MacBook release. Besides, you don't have much choice if you want to develop for the iPhone.

As for work, I don't care. Like more and more people in the development industry, I'm now platform agnostic. Java runs everywhere, Eclipse runs everywhere, PHP or Ruby run everywhere. I could switch on a daily basis between Windows, MacOS or Linux and barely notice it...
This is a trend that will also hit the end user as Web Applications and desktop applications built on AIR will increase in market shares... Then, the threat will be mainly for Apple, because the one thing that won't work as webapps or AIR are games. And games and Mac do not mix well, since Steve Jobs doesn't believe in gaming...

Quote:

PS: I'd make a serious bet that there are people that work at Apple that have PCs... or GAWD forbid... I'd bet there are a ton of PC's (for engineering, office-type work) in Cupertino.

iMac is marketed as a consumer machine first and foremost. If you want to do pro work, use a pro machine.

And once the MacBook Pro are all glossy too, what will you do? Doesn't the "Pro" in them actually stands for "Pro"?
Besides, that's flawed logic. Merely retouching your photographies is not pro works, it's something many amateurs do, and they don't have $2500 to fork into a "pro" computer they have no use for. You don't need a dual Xeon or EEC RAM for photography, you just need an average Core 2 Duo and a decent screen.

Quote:

Funny you should mention that. I forget which brand, but supposedly at least one of those two used Hasselblad cameras to make their product shots of their cameras. Yeah, it's a different kind of camera, but still a camera they don't make in house.

I don't see what's weird there, it's perfectly normal.
If you do serious pack shot photography and if you need to print big, you need medium format. If you need very shallow DoF, you need medium format. And if you need absolute control of that DoF, you need a view camera. So, it's natural that studios specialized in pack shots will use these.
However, this is a niche market. It's natural that brands like Canon or Nikon, which are there for the mass market, do not bother with building these.
It would be like being surprised that Apple doesn't use Macs and MacOS for running its corporate Data Warehouse. I certainly hope they don't use they own products for that!

Quote:

If that's what MS wants to do, they would better served by going to an agency that uses the tools they want used.

It's even more probable that Microsoft does not even know who did the video. I mean, on some contracts, we are sub-sub-sub contractors. Do you really think the original client actually knows who we are? It's probably the case there. Microsoft hired a company to come up with the idea, that company hired another one to work the idea into a script and that company hired another one to produce it, and that one hired a shop to do the print... Microsoft is probably as much aware of the little company at the end of the chain that you are aware of what company built the buttons of your shirts...

I think the end game for MSFT will be when Apple designs software that will allow the seamless integration with active directory by managing group policy from a mac server. I know Apple could make a better product than what we currently have to use. If this were available I seriously think you would see enormous growth in the business market. As an IT director at a hospital it is much harder due to the amount of software tied to windows. I don't want to bring in a Mac and run windows on it. I want to bring in a Mac and run the apps we need and lock them down with group policy all on Mac OS. Why buy a Mac just to run Windows....

No, it would be like telling the plumber 'I know you normally usually use A1 brand wrenches, but we manufacture XYZ brand wrenches, and it's important to us that you use our wrenches for this job.'

It's kind of like Alpha bricks building their new brick showroom using their competitors bricks. Or Canon photographing their products using Nikon cameras.

If you're going to try and showcase what can be achieved with a particular product, you have to avoid using competing products. DUH!

Anybody who has any advertising agency experience will tell you that the agency will agree to anything in order to secure a big money client like Microsoft. If Microsoft stipulated that the creatives working on their account come to work everyday dressed in frogmen suits, the agency would agree to it unconditionally. Retraining the creatives to work on PCs is small fry compared to some of the hoops they have to jump through in order to secure business.

No, it doesn't matter how you spin this, this is a colossal cock-up for both Microsoft and the advertising agency involved. I wouldn't be surprised if this very example is used in years to come to disprove that 'there's no such thing as bad publicity'.

Agreed. That's why I posted what I did. Apple posted about VIRUSES and then got NORTON for BOH, ask ANY APPLE EMPLOYEE and they will, if you know them well, confirm this, plus I have screen shots, which include the infamous TIMBUKTU (so Apple can watch) and only on FIREWALL PROTECTED COMPUTERS as that is where APPLE DIRECTORY IS STORE, and EACH EMPLOYEE has access to what they call "MY PAGE" which is part of HR, which is part of ARW, where you can see everything from PAY RATE to SOCIAL to buying products at 25% off. The other was, LEOPARD, there was a MEMO on the ARW main page where you go for daily news that said DO NOT INSTALL LEOPARD ON BOH machines UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE (this is why I uploaded a APPLE DOCUMENT) which you cannot find floating around the web and not sure how long it will last, but I also have NORTON SCREEN SHOTS and found it IRONIC THAT IS WAS about 9 MONTHS BEFORE LEOPARD was installed, about the same time Pro Tools came out with LEOPARD drivers for HD.

I like both products, but really folks, what gets me is, have you ever seen the ONE TO ONE customer? They don't know the difference between RAM and HARD DRIVE memory/storage and IT USED to be for FINAL CUT, and now it's all about switching (SESSION GUIDES ANYONE)...and iWork, iLife.....its all consumer and the PRO gets the short end of the stick.

 No MATTE for iMAC
 No dedicated GPU for low end
 No T.I. FIREWIRE for MACBOOK or iMAC
 Apple takes what little work you could do in motion on MACBOOK away, from 171% OPEN GL TEST with XBENCH to 71% with X300, and since you could not play games but only run motion, it affected only the CREATIVE which is less that 1% and 22% is from APPLE RETAIL, and these stores (some) bring in 150K per day.

This is supposed to be some shocking and embarrassing revelation?! Please. Give me a break. Why is this even news? Find me an ad agency or video production company ANYWHERE in the world that uses PC's. They are ALL Macs.

Apple did NOT update to LEOPARD on their behind firewall (BOH) computers until just a few months ago and yes, they run NORTON ANTI VIRUS on those machines while also running TIMBUKTU so they can watch any computer at any time whereas the GENIUS and CREATIVE room computers are NOT tied to those BEHIND THE FIREWALL machines.

What is it that you find hard to believe! Are you shocked?

I have all kinds of information I could tell you if I wanted. What don't you believe or are you just in shock that what I typed cannot possibly be true!?

I don't a single Apple employee of anyone that has ever worked for Apple, as far as I know. I use the best tool that fit my needs. Right now that is OS X, but if a better tool comes along I will not hesitate to use it. My loyalties only lays with what suits my needs best.

The FUD I was referring to is idea that Gates bailed Apple out with a $150M loan. Apple was certainly struggling then, but a $150M would not have made a difference, even if it were a gift and not a loan. They were certainly able to buy NeXT for $400M. The $150M in non-voting shares was a good faith agreement that guaranteed MS Office on Macs for at least the next 5 years and showed the stock holders that other customers that Apple wasn't going anywhere. Calendar Q4 2007 Apple had a reported $45M profit. The situation was considerably more complex that I just listed, but a bail out it was not.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

This is a stupid story and it makes everyone who plays into look just and un-informed.

Anyone who knows anything about anything knows that large corporations including Apple have their advertising done outside at an advertising agency and these materials are created and conceived at the agency and pitched to company representatives. The company itself has no say over what tools the agency uses in-house. I't be like tell your plumber what brand of wrenches he would use.

Apple and Adobe are a great creative platform, let's not erase that fact be letting our idiocy show.

Are there NO agencies that use Vista? If there ARE agencies that use Vista, then common sense would dictate that they be chosen to make an ad of this nature. The irony is there, plain as day. This is funny as hell!

No kidding. I'm a diehard mac user, but this story and the vast majority of comments here make it a somewhat embarrassing thing to claim.

Give MS a break... they're clearly having enough problems with their ad campaign.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lictor

I don't see what's surprising... Do people actually believe that a company like Microsoft (or Apple for that matter) does its own advertising? They just outsource it, like the rest of the corporations. And contractors work with whatever software and hardware they work the best with. Though they made a huge fault by not covering their track properly...

It's no more surprising than it would be to find that the latest Canon pack shots were made with a Nikon (or the reverse). Or that Apple doesn't trust it's own OS enough to use it to host its website but uses Linux instead like we all do.

Really nothing new there, people "discover" these facts once in a while, it makes a lot of noise and then the buzz dies...

Not all of the images on the PressPass site were generated on Macs. The sample print ads, which highlight the campaign's "Life Without Walls" slogan, were produced using the Windows version of Adobe Photoshop, according to their files.

And, as a user on another site said... "I don't know why this is newsworthy. I'm a developer of Windows applications, I use Vista and on our team and we have 3 graphics designers who use Macs for their design work. Windows is still the way to go for mainstream business software but that doesn't mean Mac isn't useful... this isn't a us vs. you battle where 1 party always fails and the other doesn't. Both's OS's have their merits and high points."

Think about this: Apple is a hardware company (self-described) and MS is a software company (if you discount Xbox and Zune). We are talking computers here, right: PC's verses Macs? Apple's ads are mainly aimed at other hardware companies- buy Apple, not Dell. MS's new ads are aimed a hardware company - Apple - that runs Office (MS has a whole BU for Macintosh) and Windows. Now, what's the message from MS then? Don't buy Apple because...what? It's not a PC? MS doesn't make a PC. Are they saying Macs aren't personal computers? If they said, "Buy Vista, not OS X" it would make sense. Someone please explain this to me...

Scene: Ad agency account executive (Fred) escorting Bill Gates look-alike through the halls of an ad agency. They walk up to a door marked TOP SECRET: Microsoft Ad Campaign Team.

Ad exec Fred: And this is where the magic happens. These are the guys who actually put together those great commercials for Microsoft.

Gates wanders in shakes a few hands and stops dead in his tracks, starring at at a macpro hooked up to an apple display sitting on one of the desks. He looks stunned. He looks around and notices every workstation has a macpro or a 24 iMac.

Gatest"Say, Fred, I notice that all the computers in this room are Macs."

Fred: "Oh, Bill, Im sure we have some PCs in here."(scans the room, sees none).

Fred leans over to an account guy at a desk, and whispers Sam, we do have some PCs in here, dont we?

Sam: (looking sheepish) whispering to Fred so that Gates can not hear: Actually, we dont. Used to, but we got rid of them. They just didn't work well enough for us.

Fred to Gates: Bill I understand that all these computers are going to be replaced by PCs soon and these guys cant wait to get them, Right guys?

Mac says it is not a PC everytime they try to dress a hip guy up to call himself a MAC and a geek up to call himself a PC, after all the commercial doesn't say "I am a PC running OSX made by Apple" and "I am a PC running Vista made by DELL" No it is Apple a hardware company competing against Microsoft a Software company.

Mac says it is not a PC everytime they try to dress a hip guy up to call himself a MAC and a geek up to call himself a PC, after all the commercial doesn't say "I am a PC running OSX made by Apple" and "I am a PC running Vista made by DELL" No it is Apple a hardware company competing against Microsoft a Software company.

I'm not sure how you get your conclusion in the last sentence from the previous sentences. Apple is comparing itself to the vast majority of l non-Mac PCs. The Mac even says "I'm a PC, too" in the 'Touché' ad.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Not all of the images on the PressPass site were generated on Macs. The sample print ads, which highlight the campaign's "Life Without Walls" slogan, were produced using the Windows version of Adobe Photoshop, according to their files.

And, as a user on another site said... "I don't know why this is newsworthy. I'm a developer of Windows applications, I use Vista and on our team and we have 3 graphics designers who use Macs for their design work. Windows is still the way to go for mainstream business software but that doesn't mean Mac isn't useful... this isn't a us vs. you battle where 1 party always fails and the other doesn't. Both's OS's have their merits and high points."

You have to agree with that huh?

This guy, makes a lot of sense. I just wish everyone with there childish MAC is better or PC is better attitudes would think like him. This whole thing kinda reminds me of when I was in junior high and computers were just coming out, everyone was always arguing about Chevy and Ford. Like a hip guy would come out and say I am a Chevy and some loser would come out and say I am a Ford and people would argue about which is better. When they both serve practically the same purpose and both have their strengths and weakness.

I'm not sure how you get your conclusion in the last sentence from the previous sentences. Apple is comparing itself to the vast majority of l non-Mac PCs. The Mac even says "I'm a PC, too" in the 'Touché' ad.

That is the only ad I have ever seen that in. Any other ad he refers to himself as a MAC as if a MAC is different than a PC.

That is the only ad I have ever seen that in. Any other ad he refers to himself as a MAC as if a MAC is different than a PC.

Bottom Line is the Commercials are stupid and the whole argument is just like the Special Olympics! And I just wish that a company that has a product as good as the MAC could figure out someway to advertise its product that was more clever than just taking pot shots at Microsoft.

That is the only ad I have ever seen that in. Any other ad he refers to himself as a MAC as if a MAC is different than a PC.

The whole point of the ads are that Macs are different from PCs. Your assessment what that "it is Apple a hardware company competing against Microsoft a Software company." Apple is competing against all non-Mac PC vendors and against other OSes in both look and feel of the HW and SW, so they expressing how "PC"s are bland and ordinary and while Macs are a cut above.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

Wow, the news of the century, an ad/creative agency using a Mac, that SO must mean Macs are better at everything!

Guess what?

Apple uses PC's to design Macs! And all the rest of their hardware. All their CAD/CAM work is done on PC's.
Microsoft doesn't need to use Macs to write Windows or produce any of their products. 'Nuff said.

Microsoft doesn't need to use Macs to write Windows or produce any of their products. 'Nuff said.

That sure would make it hard on their developers to produce anything that Microsoft offers at their Mactopia website for Mac, which includes: Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Entourage, Messenger, & Remote Desktop. 'Nuff said.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

You have chosen pretty much the worst choice to get any factual, objective news on tech, especially relating to Apple. MS would have developed Office for the Mac anyway, as they profit quite well from its development.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"